Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Sol Fallstaff
|
Posted - 2010.11.27 15:57:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Sol Fallstaff on 27/11/2010 15:59:13 With the learning skills now removed which i think is a good idea, how about we now make rigs and implants removeable, I think this would get a lot of carebears to dip their toes into PVP rather than run the same ol missions over and over again and then quit through boredom.
Downsides - the high end rigs and implants will probably drop in price over time.
Upsides - more people will PVP as they wont be that bothered if they lose inexpensive rigs and implants. Markets will be stimulated as more ships and modules are purchased. More players will experience PVP.
Yes I know you can use clones but a 24 hour window to change back is far to long imo and having other clones with a certain pvp setup is just too inflexible. Out of curiosty why were the rigs and implants implemented in such a permanent inflexible manner which overall discourages PVP to some.
|
Antihrist Pripravnik
4S Corporation Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2010.11.27 15:59:00 -
[2]
Rigs are already cheap enough. Especially medium and small ones.
|
baltec1
Antares Shipyards Angry Dogs
|
Posted - 2010.11.27 16:06:00 -
[3]
Use a jump clone
Dont fly anything you cannot afford to lose.
I just solved both of your issues
|
Sol Fallstaff
|
Posted - 2010.11.27 16:09:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Sol Fallstaff on 27/11/2010 16:12:54
Originally by: baltec1 Use a jump clone
Dont fly anything you cannot afford to lose.
I just solved both of your issues
Not sure why you would want to keep a game mechanic which stifles choice and discourages players from PVPing, especially a mechanic that affects new players more due to their earning ability. Would of thought that as this game is "supposedly PVP centered" the designers would want to encourage as many players to PVP as they could rather than make it harder or more expensive.
|
Omara Otawan
|
Posted - 2010.11.27 16:24:00 -
[5]
Removing rigs... lets see.
You want to encourage new players to try out PVP, and help them out by enabling them to remove the expensive rigs from their mission ship so they can go lose it in PVP.
Then they can quit because they lost their only ship, and all they have left is a rookie ship and some large rigs.
Sounds like a good idea.
|
baltec1
Antares Shipyards Angry Dogs
|
Posted - 2010.11.27 16:28:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Sol Fallstaff Edited by: Sol Fallstaff on 27/11/2010 16:12:54
Originally by: baltec1 Use a jump clone
Dont fly anything you cannot afford to lose.
I just solved both of your issues
Not sure why you would want to keep a game mechanic which stifles choice and discourages players from PVPing, especially a mechanic that affects new players more due to their earning ability. Would of thought that as this game is "supposedly PVP centered" the designers would want to encourage as many players to PVP as they could rather than make it harder or more expensive.
What is so unaffordable about a rifter? or a thorax?
|
Wu Jiaqiu
Minmatar Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
|
Posted - 2010.11.27 16:29:00 -
[7]
This idea is terrible. Dying in PvP must sting, like hell.
|
Tres Farmer
Gallente Federation Intelligence Service
|
Posted - 2010.11.27 16:33:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Sol Fallstaff
Originally by: baltec1 Use a jump clone Dont fly anything you cannot afford to lose. I just solved both of your issues
Not sure why you would want to keep a game mechanic which stifles choice and discourages players from PVPing, especially a mechanic that affects new players more due to their earning ability. Would of thought that as this game is "supposedly PVP centered" the designers would want to encourage as many players to PVP as they could rather than make it harder or more expensive.
Without cost the PvP would be meaningless and the adrenalin-rush simply wouldn't be there.. that's what makes the PvP in Eve so good. You can loose your stuff! Without that you'll loose most of the hard core 'PvPers'.
So, now some ideas for you why there aren't more people PvP'ing via ship-combat.. 1) most people I personally now log into the game to have some fun with others after a day of work.. they're stressed enough and want to relax 2) some people have their adrenalin-rush in different ways than you. Ever planned something and after hours/days/weeks it worked out to your favor? This can be market/trading or just plain old corp-theft. 3) many people are risk averse and more of the building-a-castle-kind. They don't like to risk something they worked so long and hard for. 4) .. New Eden needs a Public Feature/Idea/Bug-Tracker |
Misanthra
|
Posted - 2010.11.27 17:12:00 -
[9]
Cheap pvp with implants....if learning a int/mem skill, just run those 2 +3's. Perc/willpower....I'll let you guess which 2 to run. Cheaper blows ups...and for me they happened less. For some reason when I run 4 implants...I get podded alot more. Run just 2 and pod gets home damn near everytime (hell one time pod down to like 35% structure...made 10 jumps back in null sec. ran 2 jc's atleast with split implants, worked well or me and when I don't want those implants, pod, hell eve even ship anymore...only replace 2 +3's to save costs.
Rigs...small and medium are cheap as chips. No reason to be broke losing them. Larges...by the time you get your fleet BS money for them should be less of an issue. If that broke...salvage your missions/belts and buy the bpo's (which are quite cheap actually....most smalls perfect me is like an ME of less than 5 (even raw, the bpo is not too parts hungry).
|
Lubomir Penev
Sausages of Truth S I L E N T.
|
Posted - 2010.11.27 17:14:00 -
[10]
Who the hell would prefer to fight without hardwirings... The guy you're facing got them, you need them too.
|
|
Professor Tarantula
Hedion University
|
Posted - 2010.11.27 17:21:00 -
[11]
Gates are the reason many people don't want to 'dip their toes' in PvP.
They don't mind being in areas where PvP can happen so much, but gate camps are just too easy to set up and restrict travel to anyone who isn't in a cov ops.
My Warmest Regards. Prof. Tarantula, Esq. |
Rashmika Clavain
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.11.27 17:35:00 -
[12]
Give an inch and the forum trolls want a mile.
[html]http://skilltrainingcomplete.com/users/flair/1417.html[/html] |
Jennifer Starling
Amarr
|
Posted - 2010.11.27 17:35:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Jennifer Starling on 27/11/2010 17:35:48 Rigs: why would you want to remove them? It's a choice to fit them and unless you use T2s or large ones the cost isn't that high. If the rigs cost a multitude of the ship, buy another ship to PvP with.
Implants: I agree, why would you have to suffer a 24h training speed penalty if you want to (learn to) PvP? It doesn't make sense that learning to pvp should result in less SP?! Solution: cheap implants that only last for 24-48 hours.
|
Sol Fallstaff
|
Posted - 2010.11.27 17:36:00 -
[14]
All the above comments against this idea are of course your opinion, but nobody has of yet explained why its a good idea to have this inflexability within a ship or a clone.
Stating simply that its gotta really hurt a player financialy becuase he dared to attempt to PVP and lost doesnt really cut it as an argument.
I'll accept that it is easier to have a pvp ship in hanger with the relevant rigs, but the clone implants should be removeable, or at the very least the time for allowing to clone jump should be drastically reduced. Preferable removeable to reduve a player being able to hop all over the eve universe.
As far as I'm concerened the current mechanics are too restrictive.
|
Tom Gerard
|
Posted - 2010.11.27 17:50:00 -
[15]
Good Idea but it too heavily favors Caldari so I must oppose it.
|
Vertisce Soritenshi
O.W.N. Corp OWN Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.11.27 17:54:00 -
[16]
This is just an excuse. PvP is already cheap and inexpensive. I can have a fully T2 fitted and T1 rigged Drake up and running for 50 mil to use in PvP. Don't use implants in PvP...the only people who do are the ones that can afford to lose them. There are no excuses for not doing PvP already except for just being a carebear. Using Jump Clones you can jump into 0.0 to PvP and then jump back out into Empire the next day to PvE if you want.
No need to make Rigs removable and ruin their already reduced value by flooding the market with them. No need to do the same with implants.
Sig.Learning skills vote. |
Ava Starfire
Minmatar Nordanverdr Modr
|
Posted - 2010.11.27 17:57:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Sol Fallstaff All the above comments against this idea are of course your opinion, but nobody has of yet explained why its a good idea to have this inflexability within a ship or a clone.
Stating simply that its gotta really hurt a player financialy becuase he dared to attempt to PVP and lost doesnt really cut it as an argument.
I'll accept that it is easier to have a pvp ship in hanger with the relevant rigs, but the clone implants should be removeable, or at the very least the time for allowing to clone jump should be drastically reduced. Preferable removeable to reduve a player being able to hop all over the eve universe.
As far as I'm concerened the current mechanics are too restrictive.
I wish jump clones were removed from the game, personally. I risk my implants when I PVP, why shouldnt you? Yep, losing a few hundred M in implants hurts. That's the point. And if at the frig/cruiser level, you cant afford to lose a few m in rigs, you probably shouldnt be PVPing.
Dirty Little Slave, reporting for duty! |
Sol Fallstaff
|
Posted - 2010.11.27 18:07:00 -
[18]
Anyone got a better excuse to keep the current implant mechanic other than its gotta hurt financially to PVP. ( I'll concede the rigs one )
Nobody in their right mind is gonna PVP with 5% or +5 implants unless of course you are incredible rich. so most players are gonna clone jump to a PVP clone so why have an annoying mechanic that forces people to wait 24 hours to get back to their main clone. People are still gonna use the 3% implants I do. Am just ****ed that If I want to scan or run mission or PVP which of course can be in many different ships which in turn can be used in many different roles within PVP, basically far more roles than 6 clones can ever hope to cover.
So why have such a restrictive gameplay mechanic that does noone any favours nor advances the gameplay in any meaningfull way.
|
alittlebirdy
|
Posted - 2010.11.27 18:11:00 -
[19]
Remove isk next... only logical thing to do, if learning skills were hard, or something you had to do or whatever dumb ass reasons were givin... damn ISK fits the perfectly.
|
Herping yourDerp
|
Posted - 2010.11.27 18:19:00 -
[20]
implants meant to be isk sinks, you buy them from LP store, you die you lose them. Rig remove salvaged matterials from the market
this idea would screw the market up, and jump clones only cost 100k, so this idea wont work.
|
|
Skex Relbore
Gallente Red Federation
|
Posted - 2010.11.27 18:26:00 -
[21]
Yeah bad idea.
I do think that the LP costs on attribute implants should be lowered though I think if they were cheaper more people would be willing to risk them and that would encourage more PVP since people wouldn't be as likely to do the mental math of whether or not they would rather go to null/wh space to shoot stuff or get their best skill time.
|
Jennifer Starling
Amarr
|
Posted - 2010.11.27 18:29:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Jennifer Starling on 27/11/2010 18:30:14
Originally by: Herping yourDerp implants meant to be isk sinks, you buy them from LP store, you die you lose them.
this idea would screw the market up, and jump clones only cost 100k, so this idea wont work.
It's not about the price of rigs, I don't mind losing rigged ships but I do mind jumping into a PvP clone and losing 24 hours of faster skilltraining.
No-one in his/her right mind would use +4/+5 implants in PvP and many people who have them and can't/don't want to use jump clones are prevented from doing PvP this way. It would be better for the economy if they did lose some rigged ships every now and then and learned to PvP than stay in highsec, don't you think?
A lot of people complain about the lack of people in lowsec to do some casual solo/small gang PvP - well here's one reason of why that is the case.
|
Brian Ballsack
|
Posted - 2010.11.27 19:59:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Professor Tarantula Gates are the reason many people don't want to 'dip their toes' in PvP.
They don't mind being in areas where PvP can happen so much, but gate camps are just too easy to set up and restrict travel to anyone who isn't in a cov ops.
Bizarre asumption, maybe learn to play before you can comment please. |
Adunh Slavy
|
Posted - 2010.11.27 20:03:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Brian Ballsack
Originally by: Professor Tarantula Gates are the reason many people don't want to 'dip their toes' in PvP.
They don't mind being in areas where PvP can happen so much, but gate camps are just too easy to set up and restrict travel to anyone who isn't in a cov ops.
Bizarre asumption, maybe learn to play before you can comment please.
Gates suck. So do docking games. Blind session changes hinder a lot of people. Eve should be more than spawn camping. |
Sinister Dextor
|
Posted - 2010.11.27 20:13:00 -
[25]
Carebears will come up with an endless number of reasons why they won't want to get into PvP, all of them spurious. Truth is,even though they say, change this or that, or when I have enough sp blah blah blah, they will never willingly risk it. So any change you care to imagine will have zero effect. Forget it, and them.
|
Feilamya
Pain Elemental
|
Posted - 2010.11.27 20:47:00 -
[26]
Edited by: Feilamya on 27/11/2010 20:46:50 PVP must be discouraged by high risk. This is the only way to keep it fun.
If you disagree, go play UT3.
|
Vaal Erit
Science and Trade Institute
|
Posted - 2010.11.27 20:55:00 -
[27]
Back in the day you had to put 2x polycarbon rigs on your vagabond and those polycarbons cost 55m EACH and people PvP'd all the time. Not to mention the really old days of 250m Vagas and 10m Invuln IIs and the such.
As such the price of equipment does not mean more or less PvP. What needs to be done is that the tutorial needs to emphasize that this is a game slanted towards PvP and that PvP itself is not an evil activity only done by psychopaths that are terrible people in real life. Losing a ship is not a big deal as is - It's not "Play through a pre-set story, become stronger, do endgame". Gameplay is open ended, and you make your own story. Unless you're too afraid of 'pvp grief' to do anything relevant |
Marchocias
Snatch Victory
|
Posted - 2010.11.27 21:36:00 -
[28]
There was a time before rigs.
Their introduction did not increase bears reluctance to fight. Removing them will not encourage PvP. Some people just dont want to fight. Pointlessly removing bits of the game, in some attempt to make people do something that thye simply don't want to is ludicrous. ---- I belong to Silent Ninja (Hopefully that should cover it). |
ExcalibursTemplar
|
Posted - 2010.11.27 21:43:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Marchocias There was a time before rigs.
Their introduction did not increase bears reluctance to fight. Removing them will not encourage PvP. Some people just dont want to fight. Pointlessly removing bits of the game, in some attempt to make people do something that thye simply don't want to is ludicrous.
Spot on eve is a sandbox game and people should be allowed to do whatever they want as thats the whole idea of a sandbox game.
|
Professor Tarantula
Hedion University
|
Posted - 2010.11.27 21:54:00 -
[30]
Edited by: Professor Tarantula on 27/11/2010 21:59:58
Originally by: Brian Ballsack
Originally by: Professor Tarantula Gates are the reason many people don't want to 'dip their toes' in PvP.
They don't mind being in areas where PvP can happen so much, but gate camps are just too easy to set up and restrict travel to anyone who isn't in a cov ops.
Bizarre asumption, maybe learn to play before you can comment please.
How's that a bizarre assumption?
Everytime i want to enter lowsec or 0.0, being prepared for PvP is less of a factor in what fitting and ship to use than beating gatecamps is. I'd be taking all kinds of crazy expensive ships into lowsec and 0.0 if i didnt have to worry about gatecamps. Instead i just take cheap fast aligning frigates or cov ops which no one is ever going to catch.
Not only do gatecamps keep me from taking ships i'd actually like to use in lowsec and 0.0, but they keep those ships from maybe ending up on killmails. It's bad for everyone.
My Warmest Regards. Prof. Tarantula, Esq. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |